Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that discussions over ending the war in Ukraine have entered a productive phase, while claiming “a tremendous amount of progress” had been made.

Following a round of talks with a Ukrainian delegation in Geneva, Switzerland, Rubio told reporters negotiators had “a very good day today.”

“We had a very good day today. I think we made a tremendous amount of progress, even from the last time I spoke to you,” Rubio said.

“We began almost three weeks ago with a foundational document that we socialized and ran by both sides, and with input from both sides,” he said.

LAVROV OFFERS FACE-TO-FACE MEETING WITH RUBIO AS RUSSIA SIGNALS DIPLOMATIC OPENING AMID UKRAINE TENSIONS

Rubio described how negotiators had been refining the 28-point peace framework that outlines potential conditions for a ceasefire and long-term settlement for Ukraine and Russia.

“Over the last 96 hours or more, there’s been extensive engagement with the Ukrainian side including our Secretary of the Army and others, being on the ground in Kyiv, meeting with relevant stakeholders across the Ukrainian political spectrum in the legislative branch and the executive branch, and the military and others to further sort of narrow these points.”

TRUMP AND ZELENSKYY TO MEET AS POLAND PRESSURES NATO ON NO FLY ZONE OVER UKRAINE

“We arrived here today with one goal: to take what – it’s 28 points or 26 points, depending on which version, as it continued to evolve and try to narrow the ones that were open items. And we have achieved that today in a very substantial way,” he said.

The weekend talks centered on a 28-point plan, which is a framework drafted by the U.S. outlining steps for a possible ceasefire and political settlement.

The document is said to cover security guarantees, territorial control, reconstruction mechanisms, and Ukraine’s long-term relationship with NATO and the EU.

ZELENSKYY WARNS UKRAINE FACES ‘DIFFICULT CHOICE’ AS US PEACE PLAN HITS MAJOR HURDLE

The plan has reportedly evolved through several iterations, narrowing disputes point by point as both sides weigh concessions.

“Now, obviously, like any final agreement, it’ll have to be agreed upon by the presidents, and there are a couple of issues that we need to continue to work on,” Rubio clarified.

While declining to specify unresolved issues, Rubio described the moment as “delicate.”

“This is a very delicate moment, and it’s important – like I said, there’s not agreement on those yet.  Some of it is semantics or language; others require higher-level decisions and consultation; others, I think, just need more time to work through,” he said before touching on some issues.

US AND RUSSIA DRAFT PEACE PLAN FOR UKRAINE REQUIRING MAJOR CONCESSIONS FROM KYIV

“There were some that involved equities or the role of the EU or of NATO or so forth, and those we kind of segregated out because we just met with the national security advisors for various European countries, and those are things we’ll have to discuss with them because it involves them.”

“I don’t want to declare victory or finality here. There’s still some work to be done,” he added.

Suggesting there is intent to ensure Ukraine’s security, Rubio said that they all “recognize that part of getting a final end to this war will require for Ukraine to feel as if it is safe, and it is never going to be invaded or attacked again.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I honestly believe we’ll get there,” he said, and when asked about next steps, Rubio said a possible call between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy could happen, adding, “I don’t know. It’s possible. I’m not sure.”

“The deadline is we want to get this done as soon as possible. Obviously, we’d love it to be Thursday,” he added.

Today we discuss Texas, overreaction and the voluminous field of candidates for California governor.

Is there anyone who is not running for governor?

I’m not. And neither are my two cats. At least they weren’t as of this morning, when we discussed the race before breakfast.

That leaves us somewhat short of the 135 candidates who ran in California’s 2003 recall gubernatorial election. But not by much.

I count nearly a dozen serious candidates, with possibly more to come. Why so many?

Opportunity.

This is the most wide-open race for California governor in decades. By comparison, you’d have to go back to at least 1998, when Lt. Gov. Gray Davis surged past a pair of moneybag candidates, Al Checchi and Rep. Jane Harman, in the Democratic primary, then stomped Republican Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren in November to win the general election.

Now, as then, there is no one who even remotely resembles a prohibitive front-runner.

Polling in the governor’s race has shown former Democratic Rep. Katie Porter and Chad Bianco, Riverside County’s Republican sheriff, narrowly leading the field. But with support for both in the middling 13%-to-21% range, we’re not talking about a pair of world-beaters.

Like nature, political ambition abhors a vacuum.

Speaking of moneybags…

Tom Steyer!

Yes.

After making a bundle as a hedge fund manager, the San Francisco billionaire and environmental activist has been panting after public office for years. Running for president didn’t work out in 2020, even after Steyer spent more than $345 million on his effort. (That’s close to what the Dodgers spent on their 2025 payroll.)

So now Steyer is running for governor, a move he appeared to telegraph by airing nearly $13 million in self-promotional ads that, oh yes, supported passage of Proposition 50, the Democratic gerrymander initiative.

What are his chances?

Longtime readers of this column — both of you! — will know I make no predictions.

But California voters have never looked favorably upon rich candidates trying to make the leap from political civilian to the governorship or U.S. Senate. In fact, over the last 50-plus years, a gilded gallery of the well-to-do have tried and spectacularly failed.

Perhaps Steyer will display the policy chops or the razzle and dazzle they all lacked. But his launch video certainly didn’t shatter any molds. Rather, it presented a stereotypical grab bag of redwood trees, potshots at Sacramento, multicultural images of hard-working-everyday-folk, a promise to fight, a pledge to build more housing and, of course, a dash of profanity because, gosh darn it, nothing says “unbridled authenticity” like a political candidate swearing!

Maybe his fellow billionaire, Rick Caruso, will show more creativity and imagination if he gets into the governor’s race.

At least Democrats have been showing signs of life.

Indeed. Dare I say, the party’s mood swing from near-suicidal to euphoric has been quite something.

Winning gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia — not by a little, but a lot — and prevailing in down-ballot contests in Pennsylvania and Georgia had a remarkably transformative effect. (Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral victory in sky-blue New York City was no big surprise once the democratic socialist prevailed in the primary.)

Literally overnight, Democrats seized the momentum heading into the 2026 midterm election, while Republicans have begun scrambling to reposition their party and recraft its messaging.

All that being said, even before their buoyant off-year performance those widespread reports of Democrats’ demise were greatly … well, we’ll leave that Mark Twain chestnut alone. As analyst Charlie Cook points out, 2024 was a deeply disappointing year for the party. But it wasn’t a disaster.

Democrats gained two House seats. There was no net change in any of the 11 gubernatorial races and legislative contests across 44 states ended in something close to a wash. The party lost four Senate seats — and control of the chamber — but three of those losses came in the red states of Montana, Ohio and West Virginia.

“This is not to argue that Democrats had a great night in November 2024, but it certainly wasn’t a massacre or a party-wide repudiation,” Cook wrote in a recent posting. “If voters had intended to take it out on the party as a whole, the results would have looked quite different.”

Rather than a wholesale takedown of Democrats, the result seemed very much a rejection of President Biden and, by extension, his hasty replacement on the ballot, Vice President Kamala Harris.

What does that mean going forth?

If you’re asking whether Democrats will win control of the House or Senate…

Yes?!?

…I haven’t a clue.

Democrats need to gain three seats to take control of the House and both history and Trump’s sagging approval ratings — especially as pertains to the economy — augur well for their chances. The president’s party has lost House seats in 20 of the last 22 midterm elections and, according to Inside Elections, the fewest number of seats that flipped was four.

That’s why I thought Proposition 50, which sets out to all but decapitate California Republicans in Congress, was a bad and unnecessary move, effectively disenfranchising millions of non-Democratic voters.

An appeals court last week tossed out a Republican gerrymander in Texas, putting Democrats in an even stronger position, though the legal wrangling is far from over. The Supreme Court temporarily blocked the decision, pending review. And still to come is a high court ruling that could gut the Voting Rights Act and yield Republicans a dozen or more House seats nationwide.

So the fight for control is far from decided.

As for the Senate, Republicans stand a much better chance of keeping control, given how the seats contested in 2026 are located on largely favorable GOP terrain.

But until the votes are counted, nobody knows what will happen. That’s the thing about elections: they help keep wiseacres like me honest.

President Donald Trump on Saturday said Chicagoans are asking to “bring in Trump” amid a recent crime wave in the Democrat-run city.

At least eight teens were shot, one fatally, and multiple police officers were attacked Friday after a riot broke out in the Chicago Loop, the city’s downtown central business district.

“Massive crime and rioting in the Chicago Loop area. Multiple Police Officers attacked and badly injured. 300 people rioting, 6 victims shot, one critical and one DEAD,” Trump wrote Saturday in a Truth Social post. 

“In the meantime, Governor Pritzker and the Low IQ Mayor of Chicago are refusing Federal Government help for a situation that could be quickly remedied,” he added. “The people are chanting, BRING IN TRUMP!!!”

CHICAGO RESTAURANT OWNER SLAMS CITY LEADERSHIP OVER CRIME: ‘WE WANT LAW AND ORDER’

The riot, which followed a Christmas tree lighting ceremony, broke out near State and Randolph streets at about 10 p.m. Friday, FOX 32 Chicago reported.

City Alderman Brian Hopkins of Chicago’s 2nd Ward said 300 juveniles were rioting and attacking officers with mace and stun guns.

At least one officer was hospitalized with injuries, he confirmed.

At least six children were shot, including a 13-year-old, two 14-year-olds, a 15-year-old, a 16-year-old and a 17-year-old.

Less than an hour later, a 14-year-old boy was shot and later died at a hospital. An 18-year-old man was also wounded.

TRUMP SAYS ‘INCOMPETENT’ ILLINOIS GOVERNOR, ‘NO BETTER’ CHICAGO MAYOR SHOULD CALL HIM FOR HELP WITH CRIME

The violent weekend came days after a man with a lengthy criminal history was accused of ruthlessly setting a woman on fire while riding on a Chicago train.

Lawrence Reed, 50, who officials said “had no business being on the streets,” is charged with committing a terrorist attack or other violence against a mass transportation system.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson later called the train attack an “isolated incident.” 

Records show Reed has been arrested at least a dozen times since 2017, with charges including felony aggravated arson and multiple instances of battery.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Despite prosecutors’ request to keep him detained, a blue city judge released him back into the community with an ankle monitor.